Marks (left) and Chen (right)By Al Edwards, Acting Financial Editor
POPULAR LOCAL bills payment company Paymaster has produced a written agreement between itself and local supermarket chain SuperPlus, which refutes reports in the media and statements by Super Plus chief executive officer Wayne Chen that there was never any written agreement between the parties stipulating terms and conditions as to bill payment operations throughout its supermarkets.
Mr. Chen contends that as a result this would allow him to strike a deal with Paymaster's rival, Bill Express a bill payment subsidiary of Grace, Kennedy and Company with a view to operating bill payments and remittance payments throughout Super Plus stores.
Wednesday Business managed to obtain a copy of a "Sub-Agency Agreement and Application for Super Plus Food Stores signed in September 1999 by Wayne Chen's ex wife and director of the company Antoinette D. Chen and Paymaster's marketing manager Wayne Sinclair.
In the agreement a section refers to exclusivity which reads: "During the terms of this Agreement, sub-agent shall be Paymaster exclusive agent to offer the Service in the location and Sub-Agent agrees that it will not, during the term of the Agreement and for one year after termination of this Agreement, act as agent for or represent, or operate as principal, another bill collection/multi payment agency, or engage directly or indirectly in bill collection/multi- payment business other than as agent for Paymaster unless this Agreement has been terminated by Paymaster and only six months after date of termination."
Ms. Chen said that she could not recall signing that specific agreement but that in any event it was not a legally binding document as it did not underline the terms and conditions of the deal or refer to financial renumeration. In essence, she maintains it was drafted for the protection of Paymaster's equipment. She went on to say that agreements were signed for each individual store as Super Plus is simply a trade name and that any agreement would not apply to all 20 of its stores.
"I think the Paymaster idea and the company itself is very good but it just did not prove profitable in our stores. We were paying for everything other than the computers and telephone lines, our expenses were running in excess of the commissions Ms. Marks was paying us.
"We were very civil with them and gave them three months notice in November of last year that they should pull out of the stores as we had decided to go with Bill Express instead," said the managing director of the Montego Bay store, Antoinette Chen.
Chief Executive officer of Paymaster Ms Audrey Marks said that her company felt that Super Plus had breached an agreement with it and that there may well be legal action taken to redress this situation.
"In November 1998 we entered into an agreement to provide our services on a trial basis in Super Plus's Christiana store. After the trial period Wayne Chen was happy with us and wanted to sign us up to specific monetary conditions to which we agreed. We began operating in Super Plus stores in May Pen, Montego Bay, Portmore, and Stony Hill as well as the Christiana store. Last year Wayne Chen decided our services were no longer needed and decided to go with Bill Express instead.
"Although we do not have a problem with that decision we do have a problem with the breach of the contract whereby the very next day after Paymaster pulls out of Super Plus and Bill Express is installed, there was no indication of a change of company and our former customers are under the impression that they are still doing bill payments through Paymaster. I think this is an abuse of the good name Paymaster has built up over the last three years. I was devastated when I visited the stores we were in to find former Paymaster customers now using Bill Express under the misguided notion that they were still using Paymaster."
Ms Marks went on to say that many Bill Express customers who was wrongfully cited for non payment were complaining to Paymaster thus besmirching the company's name.
Paymaster executives attribute this to Grace, Kennedy making no effort to create a clear distinction between the two companies, citing the use of similar colours in their corporate logo and that Bill Express only operates in Super Plus stores that Paymaster formerly did business in.
Paymaster has lodged a formal complaint against Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Limited (GKRS) for breach of the Fair Competition Act. Paymaster maintains that Super Plus Food Stores terminated the contract with Paymaster on February 28, 2001.
However, it began operating another bill collection/multi-payment agency (Bills Express) on behalf of Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Limited at its May Pen branch before the termination of its agreement with Paymaster and at 6 other locations on March 1, 2001.
Additionally, Super Plus have an obligation to refer customers to Paymaster's new locations based on the terms of the contract. They have refused to do so and have taken down the signs Paymaster has erected to re-direct customers.
Paymaster believes that the supermarkets is passing off Bill Express as Paymaster with a view to retaining Paymaster's customers for Bill Express.
